It's not a bug in the "2010-03" release, which was released with kernel 2.6.36 and still shipped the ufs module, therefore I'm moving this bugreport.

About the problem, ufs in its current state still requires on the BKL to function, which has been removed in our 2.6.37 kernel, thereby breaking/ disabling ufs in the process. At this moment, no patches exist to add proper locking for BKL-less kernels for ufs, but I'd be very interested to add anything that makes ufs compatible without BKL or to backport it from development trees. Given that ufs remains to be the only serious in-kernel user of the BKL (I already backported the BKL removal for udf) - and that the ufs maintainer declared not to be able to fix it within a reasonable time frame (the BKL will be removed alltogether from the kernel in 2.6.39), it unfortunately had to bite the dust for now. While there are non-maintainer efforts to fix ufs, those are not functional yet, but I'll keep an eye on it.

FYI openSUSE has it working on 2.6.37 (11.3 w. Thumbleweed, and 11.4/factory).
Not surprising as jblunck at suse.de was working on it [url] https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/102667/ [/url] more than a year ago.

Apparently, Arnd Bergmann (the "non-maintainet efforts") specifically has a patch for ufs2 (FreeBSD and the like, mount with -o ufstype=5xbsd) and not ffs (in Linux parlance ufs1? or ufs legacy?, mount with -o ufstype=bsd44 OpenBSD and the like).

Must say it has been a very bad surprise to get that mount: unknown filesystem type 'ufs' message.
Surely this was worth a warning message to keep at least a 2.6.36 kernel.

jaegermeister

Post subject:Posted: 26.01.2011, 14:21

Joined: 2010-09-16
Posts: 28

Status: Offline

...and for this I'm quite grateful

Unfortunately I'm dealing with "-o ufstype=bsd44", therefore on dual boot linux-BSD machines 2.6.36 will now be a must

It would be nice to know, should you have more updates in the next months, how this wicked story is going...

Thanks, bfree...perhaps anyone who has a UFS filesystem to test should try that kernel. As I can see in the comments within the code that it has not been really tested on SMP systems, perhaps some brave soul can try out that code and report back.